San Francisco will become the first U.S. city to base its parking rates on driver demand citywide.Beginning in mid-January, motorists who park in the city’s 30,200 metered spaces, or in its lots and garages, will be charged more during peak times and less when demand isn’t as high. Hourly rates will vary by time of day and block by block and be adjusted up or down four times a year, depending on actual use during the previous quarter. . . .

Although several U.S. cities have experimented with limited versions of demand-based pricing, San Francisco is the first one to apply the system across the city.

MTA planners say their goal is to increase the availability of coveted city parking spaces, particularly in areas where demand is high. Where demand-based rates are raised, drivers will be motivated to shorten their stays. Or they will park outside of high-demand blocks, where rates are lower, or even leave their cars at home. . . .

Because rates can’t increase more than 25 cents a month, Willson said, it would take years for them to rise significantly. But, he said the MTA expects parking revenues to remain flat overall.

In areas that have had the demand-based rates, he said, “the best thing you can say is that it’s been a nonissue. Nobody notices.”

About 7,000 of the city’s meters already employ the demand-based rate program. The idea got its start in 2011 when the city embarked on a three-year federally funded test in several neighborhoods where parking is in short demand.

The MTA declared the program, known as SFpark, a success, and continued it in some of the city’s busiest neighborhoods — downtown, South of Market, the Mission, the Embarcadero, Fisherman’s Wharf, Mission Bay, the Fillmore and the Marina.

At the same time, the city replaced its old mechanical coin-only meters with electronic meters that take credit cards, parking cards or coins, and allow motorists to pay by mobile phone. The meters are linked, allowing them to be remotely monitored and programmed, enabling the MTA to measure demand and adjust rates. . . .

Under the program, the MTA reviews hourly rates every three months, and decides whether to raise or lower them, in 25-cent increments, or leave them unchanged. The decisions are based on how many vacant metered spaces are typically available on a block during three times of day: morning, midday and evenings.

Rates can go as low as 50 cents an hour during low-demand times or as high as $8 an hour at peak times, according to MTA policy, but the highest rate now is $7 an hour. The average rate at the existing 7,000 demand-based parking spaces, Willson said, is about $2.50. . . .

GRA wrote:For everything you probably didn't want to know about the rationale for demand-priced parking, see

http://shoup.bol.ucla.edu/PrefaceHighCostFreeParking.pdf

Fixed that for you...

For everything you probably didn't want to know about the rationale for demand-priced parking, see

Seriously, parking in SF is messed up beyond belief and demand pricing alone isn't going to fix it. A handicapped placard gives you unlimited free parking and so it's not surprising that there are more handicapped placards in SF itself than there are parking spots. A good intention with horrible consequences which of course blunts any effect of price adjustment.

Nubo wrote:Seriously, parking in SF is messed up beyond belief and demand pricing alone isn't going to fix it. A handicapped placard gives you unlimited free parking and so it's not surprising that there are more handicapped placards in SF itself than there are parking spots. A good intention with horrible consequences which of course blunts any effect of price adjustment.

There's no question that the abuse of handicapped placards is a scandal, but it's state-wide. I tend to hit the speed dial for the police anytime I see someone who obviously isn't disabled parking in a handicapped spot and sauntering away, having had to deal with this when my dad was in his '80s and still driving himself, as he had mobility limitations and needed those spaces. Noises are occasionally made about cracking down, and it finally seems like something's going to happen. Here's one such article, also from the Chronicle back in September:

SACRAMENTO — Gaming a program for drivers with disabilities is about to get much harder under a new California law set to take effect in January, starting with one common-sense measure: using federal data to help determine which disabled parking permit-holders have died.

Senate Bill 611, by Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, came in response to an April state audit revealing that as many as 35,000 parking placards issued to Californians whom the Social Security Death Master File listed as deceased were still in use.

The audit also showed that there was no limit on the number of replacement permits that could be ordered from the Department of Motor Vehicles, and that nine people ordered 16 or more from 2013 to 2016. A previous report from the state auditor revealed that 26,000 placard-holders were over the age of 100, though California had just 8,000 centenarians in 2014.

SB 611, which incorporated a number of audit recommendations, passed unanimously in both houses. Gov. Jerry Brown signed it into law on Wednesday. . . .

Last edited by GRA on Thu Dec 14, 2017 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'.Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA wrote:I tend to hit the speed dial for the police anytime I see someone who obviously isn't disabled parking in a handicapped spot and sauntering away, having had to deal with this when my dad was in his '80s and still driving himself, as he had mobility limitations and needed those spaces.

Likewise, my wife is disabled and needs the space but I wouldn't think of trying to judge someone else's disability by looking at them. That's a medical decision that I'm not qualified to make, and in fact nobody is qualified to make at a glance. I've witnessed too many instances of people being dubious about her need for a service animal and their unknowledgable attempts at "interrogation" in that regard. The root causes of fraud need to be addressed. Challenging placard holders ad-hoc is just a recipe for harassing people with geniune disabilities, imho.

Definitely the application and approval process could be improved. But probably the best thing would be to not make the parking free, so as to remove the primary incentive for cheating. That would also mean that the demand-pricing would have its intended effect. Which I do think is legitimate, despite poking fun at it.

GRA wrote:I tend to hit the speed dial for the police anytime I see someone who obviously isn't disabled parking in a handicapped spot and sauntering away, having had to deal with this when my dad was in his '80s and still driving himself, as he had mobility limitations and needed those spaces.

Likewise, my wife is disabled and needs the space but I wouldn't think of trying to judge someone else's disability by looking at them. That's a medical decision that I'm not qualified to make, and in fact nobody is qualified to make at a glance. I've witnessed too many instances of people being dubious about her need for a service animal and their unknowledgable attempts at "interrogation" in that regard. The root causes of fraud need to be addressed. Challenging placard holders ad-hoc is just a recipe for harassing people with geniune disabilities, imho.

Definitely the application and approval process could be improved. But probably the best thing would be to not make the parking free, so as to remove the primary incentive for cheating. That would also mean that the demand-pricing would have its intended effect. Which I do think is legitimate, despite poking fun at it.

I have no problem with eliminating the free parking, but that won't stop the people who park in disabled spots purely because they're too lazy to walk. I see this quite often at a local shopping mall (where all parking is free), and have called the police and had the satisfaction on a few occasions of seeing them nail people for it. On another occasion I saw a cop ticketing someone there (no placard at all, fairly common), and said to him "Good! Now, come back every day for a week until the assholes get the message!" I don't know if he did, but I have noticed a considerable fall off in that particular behavior since then. Pretty much everyone parking in those spots there now has a placard.

If there's any doubt about it, I'm going to give people the benefit of the doubt, but when I see someone half my age traipsing off to go shopping, I'm going to call. If they're legit then no problem at all, and they should be happy that someone is checking so they can have an open space. At least in my dad's case, he would have been ecstatic to have this enforced (not that anyone would have bothered him, the walker being a bit of a giveaway). As for me, I'm grateful that I don't need such a space, and am capable of walking as far as necessary. I've never understood the mindset of someone so selfish that they will cheat that way to save a few steps.

Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'.Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA wrote:There's no question that the abuse of handicapped placards is a scandal, but it's state-wide. I tend to hit the speed dial for the police anytime I see someone who obviously isn't disabled parking in a handicapped spot and sauntering away, having had to deal with this when my dad was in his '80s and still driving himself, as he had mobility limitations and needed those spaces. Noises are occasionally made about cracking down, and it finally seems like something's going to happen.

Keep in mind that while the police can verify that the handicap-tag-holder is either in the car, was just dropped off, or is about to picked up, a big amount of handicap-tag fraud is perpetuated at the physician's level with fraudulent applications to the DMV. Someone who doesn't look "obviously disabled" to the layperson, but has a valid handicap tag issued to them, can park in a handicap spot and nobody can do a thing about it, not even the police.

Also keep in mind that my father, who will be turning 90 soon, has a handicap placard but if you watched him get out of my car you'd think he was 25 years younger. And he can walk with that kind of energy, but only in short bursts. He still qualifies for the placard. So you have to be careful with appearances as well.

RonDawg wrote:Also keep in mind that my father, who will be turning 90 soon, has a handicap placard but if you watched him get out of my car you'd think he was 25 years younger. And he can walk with that kind of energy, but only in short bursts. He still qualifies for the placard. So you have to be careful with appearances as well.

My wife can walk short distances just fine, but can't walk longer distances (maybe a hundred yards/meters on a good day) without back spasms and pain. She has a placard, and we do use it at times. The wheelchair in the back seat might be a clue. But yes, we have gotten some "looks".

My dad, who is 89, has a handicap placard that he refuses to use unless that is the only spot open.

WetEV#49Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)2014 Leaf SL Red